Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Toad on September 08, 2000, 05:23:00 PM
-
Just a little humor here...you Democrats try to keep your shorts un-knoted and make witty replies! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
You MIGHT be a Democrat if...
1. You believe the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.
2. You believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
3. You believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese communists.
4. You believe that there was no art before Federal funding.
5. You believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the earth's climate, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs.
6. You believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.
7. You are against capital punishment but support abortion on demand; in short, you support protecting the guilty and killing the innocent.
8. You believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
You believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists who've never been outside of Seattle do.
10.You believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
11. You believe the military, not corrupt politicians, start wars.
12. You believe the NRA is bad, because it supports only certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports only certain parts of the Constitution.
13. You believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
14. You believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, General Robert E.Lee or Thomas Edison.
15. You believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides aren't. Because the right people haven't been in charge.
16. You believe Hillary Clinton is really a lady.
17. You believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because the right people haven't been in charge.
18. You believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail but a liar belongs in the White House.
19. You believe that a homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites and bestiality should be constitutionally protected and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
20. You believe that illegal Democratic party funding by the Chinese is somehow in the best interest of the United States.
21. You believe that one major airline instead of six is good for travelers.
OK, your turn!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
This is a pretty accurate statement of the Libs' positions. I don't find it funny, disturbing is what comes to mind.
-
Spot on toad. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Hmmmmmmm. You pretty much nailed every aspect I know of.
I'll keep in touch and edit with something once I have it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
-Rebel
JG2 "Richtofen"
"You Rebel Scum"
-
Old post, but OK, here goes...
You MIGHT be a Democrat if...
1. You believe the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.
Nope. Its spread by irresponsible people. Government funding can reduce the rate at which it is spread and can significantly decrease the time to find a cure.
2. You believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
You couldn't read until you were in the 4th grade? Teachers shouldn't have to teach sex ed, but as nobody else seems to be willing to do it, it has fallen to them. In California a form is sent home so that parents can accept or decline sex ed for their children.
3. You believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese communists.
Nope. Reagan and Bush shouldn't have let the Chinese steal our nuclear secrets and Clinton should've caught them earlier.
4. You believe that there was no art before Federal funding.
Nope. Art has a long history of being government funded. Just because that government happened to be some Venician prince instead of an elected government doesn't mean that it wasn't funded, without taxpayer choice, by tax monies. The idea of the NEA is that if art is only funded by the wealthy and corporations, the poor will not have access to it. Unfortunately some pretty tasteless things get funded, but we can't pick and choose without steping onto that slippery slope.
5. You believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the earth's climate, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs.
Nope. Pull your head outa your bellybutton if you think thats what the "global warming" people are talking about. There IS increasing evidence that the average global tempatures have gon up by about 6 degrees f. over the last 150 years. Due to the early start, it does seem that something else is also at work, but polution certainly seems to be accelerating it.
6. You believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.
Nope. They are both natural to a degree. Homosexuality may be a genetic flaw, but it does seem to be natural. Gender roles are less fixed than they used to be due to the increasing opporunities provided by our prosperity.
7. You are against capital punishment but support abortion on demand; in short, you support protecting the guilty and killing the innocent.
Er, not quite. I don't believe in removing civil liberities. Killing somebody for a horrible crime is all and well, but lets give them a fair trial first. You know, with competent defense and access to scientific tests, experts and investigators. I personally don't like abortion, but it isn't my place to tell others what they can and cannot do.
8. You believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
Nope. We just believe that both must be watched carefully as opposed to trusting business (which has no vested interest in anything other than your wallet) and not trusting government (which does have a vested interest in your survival as well as your wallet).
You believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists who've never been outside of Seattle do.
Nope. I beleive they both care about the environment. For the most part, you've got crazy wackos in both groups.
10.You believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
Nope, but self esteem is important and should be encouraged. I know that I'd of like to have been given a pat on the back and a bit of praise when I did something well. Instead I got critisized for the weaknesses of what I'd done.
11. You believe the military, not corrupt politicians, start wars.
Nope. 'Nuff said.
12. You believe the NRA is bad, because it supports only certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports only certain parts of the Constitution.
Nope. The ACLU supports all parts of the Bill of Rights. The NRA doesn't even fully support the 2nd Amendment.
13. You believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
Nope. I beleive that we should pay off the National debt and then start talking about what to to with the surplus. Tax breaks at that point would be great. ATM fees are a joke because of the profit racket that banks already have. If they weren't one of the most profitable businesses already I wouldn't have a problem withh the fees.
14. You believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, General Robert E.Lee or Thomas Edison.
Nope. Accept for General Lee. He didn't really change anything.
15. You believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides aren't. Because the right people haven't been in charge.
Nope. I don't think that standardized tests are racist. Due to ongoing problems I don't think that we are ready to get rid of Affirmative Action yet, though that is certainly the end goal.
16. You believe Hillary Clinton is really a lady.
Absolutely.
17. You believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because the right people haven't been in charge.
Nope. Pure socialism and pure capitalism are both evil and flawed. They must be balanced.
18. You believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail but a liar belongs in the White House.
Depends on what truth they're telling. If they are telling the truth about how many people they murdered and buried in their back yard, then yes. Lying is not an impeachable offense. I am heavily disappointed by him though.
19. You believe that a homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites and bestiality should be constitutionally protected and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
Nope. I don't think that either should be protected when on government property and both should be protected when on private property.
20. You believe that illegal Democratic party funding by the Chinese is somehow in the best interest of the United States.
Nope. I don't think that ANY non citizen should be allowed to donate money to political parties or action commitees. That means no money from Businesses, Labor, Foreign Individuals, Foreign Businesses, Foreign Labor or Foreign Governments. Only citizens of the US of A should be able to donate money.
21. You believe that one major airline instead of six is good for travelers.
Nope.
Thats it from this proud Liberal.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Heh. I've seen it before, and it's amusing.
Karnak's reply was pretty damned good too.
Man, I am glad I don't have to make *that* choice (US election) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Slick Willie was cool, I'd have voted for him, just because of his nick William "VelcroPants" Clinton.
Anyway, DUMA for president!
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
I don't think Karnak really IS a Democrat!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Yeah Karnak let's see some ID!
-
I AM a registered Democrat, but only because that party is closer to my viewpoints than the Republican party.
I define myself, politically, as a Social Liberal and Fiscal Conservative. Right now that means voting Democrat. For example, I consider a tax cut right now to be a Fiscal Liberal policy, like wise, spending increases are a Fiscal Liberal policy. I would like to see the national debt paid off. That is a Fiscal Conservative issue. The Democrats seem much more inclined to do this, although they insist on including tax cuts and spending increases with it. The Repblicans are proposing to give almost all of the surplus back in the form of massive tax cuts for the wealthy and a few spending increases. Democrats seem to be Fiscal Moderates by my belief and the Republicans are Fiscal Liberals. The Democrats are Social Moderates and the Republicans are Social Conservatives.
Thats .5 each for the Dems and 0 each for the Repubs. Dems get my vote 1 to 0.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Sisu
-Karnak
-
These are supposed to be J-O-K-E-S!
Ironic things that make you smile. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
They made me smile Toad. Then they made me cry. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Karnak,
I respect your opionion but I have one statement that really irks me,
"The Repblicans are proposing to give almost all of the surplus back in the form of massive tax cuts for the wealthy and a few spending increases."
Have you looked at who really pays the taxes in this country? 20% of the people in this country pay 80% of the taxes. Why is being successful looked at as a bad thing in this country now. Hard work and personel responsibility have allowed many people to get where they are at today.
I do not like the way the current political races are being turned into a class struggle.
------------------
JG 2's current cannon magnet
Milo
-
Giving $45,000 in taxes back to a guy who makes $250,000 isn't class warfare, but giving a dollar raise over two years to people who make $5.15 is?
Gore's statement about being for the people agaist the powerful wasn't about the rich vs. the poor. It was about the people, rich and poor alike, vs. the special interests.
Your standards are VERY biased I think.
I make twice what the average American makes (I make $46,000) and I would get approximately $250.00 back under Bush's plan. Thats 10 dollars per paycheck. That doesn't even buy me lunch.
I am content to pay my taxes because of the incredible opportunity that living in this country gives me and if, as I plan, my income should go up very significantly in the future, I would still be content to help my country. The rich don't NEED help. It would be nice to lower their tax rates, but lets get this debt that is slowing our economic growth off of our backs first.
In the 1990s:
CEO pay rose 530%
Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 260%
Worker pay rose 32%
Inflation was 27%
CEO pay after accounting for inflation rose 503%
Worker pay after accounting for inflation rose 5%
Workers average weekly hours increased 4%
What we can see from this is:
CEOs pay increased at twice the perfomance of their companies (DJ Industrial Average).
Workers pay increased mainly due to working greater hours, 4% more ours for 5% more income.
The rich are getting richer while the rest of us are struggling just to stay even. The lions share of wealth in this nation has been concentrated in an ever smaller percentage of the population over the last 30 years. We are moving towards a landed aristocracy.
The reason such luminaries as Abraham Lincoln (our greatest President), Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt all opposed a repeal of the Estate Tax was because it prevents, or at least hinders, the development of a landed aristocracy. A landed aristocracy does not need noble titles, just the wealth. The United States of America has always been about freedom and equality, we've stubbled at times but we try, and a landed aristocracy is incompatible with tose concepts. The Democratic Estate Tax reform was much better reasoned out. Increase the exemption range to $2,000,000 for an individual and to $4,000,000 for a couple.
That said, after the debt is paid off I would like to see some tax relief. I should also note that I do not, in any way, support a system in which there is no way to VERY significantly increase ones wealth through ones own efforts.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Well.
As a Dane, I have a solution.
Give the money to me. Not to Denmark, but to me.
That way, all sides get cheated, and I benefit.
I believe that it says this is the way it is supposed to be in the book "101 steps to make life good; here's your Life Manual".
Sadly, I haven't found a manual on life yet, but it is *out there*.
Gotta agree with karnak on this one though.
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
Damn Santa.. and I thought I was an opportunist!
Yup.. Karnaks my hero. And card carryin republicans are just un-informed sock puppets performing lip service fer the elitist rich. Show me a voter makin six figures and I'll show yah a republican.
About the only thing that ever trickled down on me during the last 4 republican administrations was sweat.. mine.
Flat tax.. everybody pays the same rate. I'm payin 30%; those fat assed rich SOB's can afford 30% too.. sure won't pork their lifestyles; like it does mine.. Bastids. Most of 'em don't even pay 2%. The salamanders.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I feel much better now.
Hang
-
LOL Hang
Had ya pegged as a republican.
There ya go; never trust first impressions (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
It's a shame when success is a sin .. Karnack's a democratic from the public school system, just look at his spelling (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Do your part, vote 'em out !!
Eagler
-
I could EASILY go for a true flat tax!
Supposedly everyone enjoys the same "blessings and gifts" of our government, so why should anyone pay more than another guy percentage-wise?
I'd even be happy to go for a reasonable "floor" so that folks under a certain income level get a "free ride".
I'd wager my taxes would be less if we did this....
Penalizing success....what a concept! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Rich does not equal wealthy. Basing wealth on a yearly income is short sighted and irresponsible. I know people making $100k a year living paycheck to paycheck. I know people making $30k a year and are quite happy and stable. The problem is assuming people who make more then you should support that vast majority of the population.
How bout I decide what people can spend their money on. I will make the decision for you. I will charge you too much and not give it back to you because I know better then you.
quick question, do you think raising the minimum wage solves any problems? Sure for the guy making minimum wage his pay goes up but what happens to the folk not on minimum wage? Yep they make less, why you say? Is the grocer gonna eat the cost of increase in employee salaries? No his prices go up to compensate, it happens across the board for people who higher minimum wage folk. End result, non minimum wage earners pay more for goods and services, i.e. you have less cash now. But it sure can rally the voters.
Balance the budget, and give me my money I was overcharged back.
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Eagler,
er, those are called typos for the most part.
Success isn't a sin. Trampling on your fellow man to do it is.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
LOL.. if yer makin 100k plus a year and yer livin paycheck to paycheck; then obviously you screwed up.
But you should still pay the same percentage of your income in taxes as the next guy; regardless of what it is.
How about this concept... Only VETERANS MAY VOTE. And; only VETERANS may hold political office.
Think about it. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Whatta world... whatta world...
Hang
Note: 2 points to the guy that recognises this 'platform', and correctly identifies the postulant. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by Hangtime:
How about this concept... Only VETERANS MAY VOTE. And; only VETERANS may hold political office.
Note: 2 points to the guy that recognises this 'platform', and correctly identifies the postulant. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mail me the points.
Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers.
I read that in 8th grade...back in..ah, nevermind!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I was working in an icecream parlor for $4.25 an hour in 1992 when Clinton was running for his first term. One night in August a gentleman comes in shortly before closing and buys an icecream cone. He then proceeds to lay out a sob story about how he'll lose his house, car, stocks and everything else if Clinton wins, as if I'm a bar tender. After a listening to his story for a good while, I decided that since he was laying everything out in the open I might as well as how much he was making.
He was making $210,000.00 a year.
All sympathy that I had for him evaporated in an instant. I was polite afterwards, but I was just faking being sympathetic.
Anybody who is making $210,000.00 a year and has arranged their finaces so badly that a change of administration will cause them to lose everything almost deserves to lose everything.
Furthermore I cannot imagine the gall it takes to deliver that sob story to a guy making minimum wage.
Given actual events, the guy probably made out like a bandit in the '90s.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
So, the guy was a putz...
what point are you making other than that?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
So no sympathy for the guy making a 100k a year huh? hmmm, but lets pay for the useless slobs that wont work or who abuse the system. Love that logic. Making money bad! Big government good!
I hear ya preaching the gospel of personal responsibilty. Thats my whole point, get the friggin government out of my backpocket and let me make my own decisions.
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Heh anyone who makes lots of cash a year and still barely have enough to feed his family is prioritizing wrongly. I've experienced being on the wrong side of that.
Raising minimum wage causes great inflation? It'd depend on the percentage of people living off minimum wages salaries. Our inflation is relatively low, yet our minimum wage is much higher than in the US, so it is quite doable without much adverse effects and good benefits if the setting is right. Whether it is so in the US I don't know.
I once worked in a factory in Sweden, for (back then) minimum wage of $10/h. I wasn't a lazy slob; started 07.15, went home around four. Pretty hard work, too. Wouldda liked to be given a few more kronor for it, since after taxes, rent and food were paid I had little to use. But, it was unskilled labour, so there ya go.
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
Exactly. Minimum wage is an "entry level" job. You're not suppose to make a living on it. Like DNIL said,raising it doesn't do anything as the cost is just past on. You help out the people who truly need it and put the rest of the population who are home in the middle of the day to answer those political polls when they call, back to work and out of my wallet. If they are on welfare, they should be on birth control. Mandatory. Get snipped and get your check. Good way to clean up the gene pool too. The day of the democrat has passed. Late 50's & early 60's they were a different group. Now .. Anyone who is trying to ban the Boyscouts because they don't allow studmuffins to be leaders of our male youth, is EVIL in my book. Anyone who boos the Boyscouts at a public function (DemocRAT convention), needs his/her arse kicked! I won't even go into pro choice BS.
Eagler
-
Eagler, no, I pretty much stayed in minimum wage for the duration of time I worked there. And, I *was* supposed to make a living. In some places, you even have to *save* money so you an get tuition and an education later.
What Dnil left out of the equation is the size of the population given the raise, and the impact on the economy can be determined using economic models, to some accuracy. It has been shown, here and other places, that increasing the minimum wages does not lead to rampant inflation.
At the very least, minimum wages should be kept up with inflation. In some places, they haven't for years. And in a capitalistic world, he who produces the same goods cheaper, wins, so while the cost will be past on to some degree, the question is where and how. This is *not* a simple question.
Regarding welfare, you're suggesting a law that goes against the constitution and whole idea of freedom. It does not correspond well with the traditional American values of liberty. Coersion might work, but it is always better to gently nudge in a driection rather than pull in questions of freedom.
Doesn't look like the democrats are going anywhere for a while,. for better or worse.
I'll let you keep your views on homosexuals to yourself, all while shaking my head in disbelief.
Didn't the Boyscouts kick out a little kid when he didn't swore allegiance to god or whatnot? I'm pretty sure I can dig up the name. Tolerant bunch; good role models for our kids.
Good thing you don't go into the pro choice BS.
You Sir, is a perfect example of the image that pops up in most Europeans heads when they hear "republican" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Take that as a compliment or something else, it's just a statement not meant to be anything more (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
"Make things as simple as they can be, but no simpler", paraphrasing Einstein. Methinks some of us are oversimplifying matters.
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
Thanks StSanta
Coming from a European, I'll take your post as a compliment (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't believe when they wrote the constitution they had any idea of the welfare program we now have in the states. What's wrong with working for a living? Too many people here laying around looking for the government to give them everything. The democrats only have to provide the illusion that the republicans are going to take away their free ride and whoa, they jump up and vote against it. Keeping the slick willie's in office.
Just for the record, I've been married since I was 19 (to the same wonderful woman)(1979). I've been a father since I was 19 (two fantastic sons). Hey guess what, I've been working full time since I was 19. I was raising a family on $3.10 an hour when I was 19 when minimum wage was $2.25. Working 55 to 70 hrs a week to provide for the family. I was fortunate to be in a line of work that provided massive amounts of overtime. No hand outs. No government assistance. I'm now a computer programmer for a large multimedia firm (about to become even larger (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). So if I can do it, I wonder why most of the others can't. One word - LAZY. The government has made it too darn easy. Almost a drug for some. And when the republicans try to get these people to work, we're mean spirited.
The democrats are good in the way they provide a balance to the other extreme. I just can't see how any hard working, God fearing US citizen can buy into their agenda though.
As for the Boy Scouts, it's an organization with rules. Follow them or don't join. It's not like they've changed them or anything, pretty black and white.
As for homosexuals, nothing against them in their own place. Don't believe they should be leaders in the Boy Scouts just like I don't think heterosexual men should be leaders in the Girl Scouts. I have had many gay friends and associates. I'm fine with it as long as they don't flaunt it or try to pass it off as an alternative lifestyle to our youth.
StSanta,thanks again for your reponse and please don't take this personal as I do enjoy the deliberation. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Toad, see what ya started (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
cu
Eagler
-
In regard to the pollution statement...
Mt. St. Helens prouduced more air pollution in that eruption then the entire human race has produced pretty much since the use of internal combustion engines began. And volcanic activity is not near what it use to be in the world.
The "evidence" of global warming is based on what is equivlant of a, well there is no equivlant, it doesn't hardly register on the geological clock.
We've been coming out of an small ice age for the last 600 years.
The Ozone hole was a big scare right? Then our friends the scientists figured out after some recalculations that the whole in the Ozone layer expands and contracts over time. Whoops.
I cannot stand it when people try to stand behind junk science.
Oh btw anyone who enlists both Cher and Oprah is absolutely not getting my vote. I have no idea how Cher's off key singing would help Gore, but the kiss thingy and Oprah are a MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE dirty way of fighting then the pathetic Bush add.
Al Gore - I went to Nam. Smoked a joint or two. Wrote about it. Woohoo.
GW Bush - My dad was in the Navy. He pulled some questionable strings to get me above a 100,000 man waiting list to get into the AFR. Can he help it he has connections? I mean, I DID keep the Cong outta Texas!
This is gonna be a bad 4 years coming, I just know it.
- Jig
-
Mt. St. Helens prouduced more air pollution in that eruption then the entire human race has produced pretty much since the use of internal combustion engines began. And volcanic activity is not near what it use to be in the world.
Not true.
The "evidence" of global warming is based on what is equivlant of a, well there is no equivlant, it doesn't hardly register on the geological clock.
Not true.
We've been coming out of an small ice age for the last 600 years.
Not true.
The Ozone hole was a big scare right? Then our friends the scientists figured out after some recalculations that the whole in the Ozone layer expands and contracts over time. Whoops.
Not true.
I cannot stand it when people try to stand behind junk science.
Neither can I, please stop.
Al Gore - I went to Nam. Smoked a joint or two. Wrote about it. Woohoo.
Funny how much this mattered to Republicans 4 and 8 years ago. Gore was a combat reporter. That means he was in the field. No evidence that he "smoked a joint or two" as you so nicely insinuated.
GW Bush - My dad was in the Navy. He pulled some questionable strings to get me above a 100,000 man waiting list to get into the AFR. Can he help it he has connections? I mean, I DID keep the Cong outta Texas!
And smoked, drank and took who knows what illegal substances, but hey, since I'm a Republican they were just youthful indiscretions. Now if a Democrat had done it, well, that'd be different.
Funny how the Republicans also cared about these issues so much more 4 and 8 years ago.
Go Al!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 09-14-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Giving $45,000 in taxes back to a guy who makes $250,000 isn't class warfare,
this is his money in a first place, isn't it?
but giving a dollar raise over two years to people who make $5.15 is?
[/b]
Are they 20% more productive now?
-
Originally posted by Hangtime:
Flat tax.. everybody pays the same rate. I'm payin 30%; those fat assed rich SOB's can afford 30% too..
30% is not a flat tax. The flat tax would be if everybody (regardles of the age) paid $8,000.
sure won't pork their lifestyles; like it does mine.. Bastids. Most of 'em don't even pay 2%.
[/b]
This is simply not true. 50% of all tax revenue comes from the top 5% of earners.
-
mietla,
Are the CEOs 530% more productive?
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Of course. My company grew from nothing in 1993 to $40 bilion today. Of course the CEO deserves 530% raise and then some. This is a private enterprise and the shareholders can do whatever they want with their money. It's their money. The company produced it.
It's only the government which never produces anything. Every dollar given away, has to be stolen from someone else first.
-
mietla,
Your response clearly indicates how out of touch with reality you are.
A discussion with you can have no further purpose.
I hope you wake up someday.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Out of touch??? You are living in the US are you? That is how it works here.
For every dollar I have earned, I have produced more than $3 for my employer (it cost them $3 to employ me at $1). And this is the way it works, you get paid a fraction of what your produce.
It's not that I'm dying to talk to you, but you're presenting a typical liberal position.
State your view as an undisputable dogma, and refuse to use logical arguments in a discussion. Use a personal attack instead. At least you did not try to insult me.
You guys are output only.
BTW, isn't this a definition of propaganda ("keep talking but never listen")?.
Cya
mietla
[This message has been edited by mietla (edited 09-15-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Mt. St. Helens prouduced more air pollution in that eruption then the entire human race has produced pretty much since the use of internal combustion engines began. And volcanic activity is not near what it use to be in the world.
Not true.
The "evidence" of global warming is based on what is equivlant of a, well there is no equivlant, it doesn't hardly register on the geological clock.
Not true.
We've been coming out of an small ice age for the last 600 years.
Not true.
The Ozone hole was a big scare right? Then our friends the scientists figured out after some recalculations that the whole in the Ozone layer expands and contracts over time. Whoops.
Not true.
I cannot stand it when people try to stand behind junk science.
Neither can I, please stop.
Al Gore - I went to Nam. Smoked a joint or two. Wrote about it. Woohoo.
Funny how much this mattered to Republicans 4 and 8 years ago. Gore was a combat reporter. That means he was in the field. No evidence that he "smoked a joint or two" as you so nicely insinuated.
GW Bush - My dad was in the Navy. He pulled some questionable strings to get me above a 100,000 man waiting list to get into the AFR. Can he help it he has connections? I mean, I DID keep the Cong outta Texas!
And smoked, drank and took who knows what illegal substances, but hey, since I'm a Republican they were just youthful indiscretions. Now if a Democrat had done it, well, that'd be different.
Funny how the Republicans also cared about these issues so much more 4 and 8 years ago.
Go Al!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 09-14-2000).]
I love all the "not true"'s (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Now can you provide evidence that shows any of that is false? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Al Gore even stated thats what he did (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) and that he rarely got close to any fighting (he was stationed on base as a reporter, not a combat writer. His dad pulled strings just like Bush's did, it was meant to be equally insulting on both Gore's and Bush's part)
Not to mention Bush has stated he "expiremented" with controled substances as well. Not much point in holding either accountable for things that happned 30 years ago.
As for the other stuff, when the geologist finally got off their arses and started doing analysis of the millions of tons of ash thrown up by Mt. St. Helens (man my yard got coated back when that happened even here in Houston, Texas) they concluded that major eruptions like that release about what we humans prouduce (at current world-wide emissions) every 100 years. The geologic pollution is even worse because of the lack of plant-life absorbstion and disperstion in the upper atomosphere because of the rapidness of the event.
Some of the scientists that orginally proposed the theory of global warming were approached by geologists will which they confirmed that by geological analysis that there was what was dubbed a "mini ice-age" between the last major one. Between the period of the general warming of the Earth's surface temperature between the last major ice age, a period between 800 A.C. and about 1400 A.C. a period of surface temperature decline occured, and the earth has been reaching towards the temperature before the mini ice age occured, which is about where we are now. They expect it to climb higher as well, because the earth's surface temperature never reached it's maximum before the mini ice age. What caused it is said to most likely have to do with the earth's orbit and how it apprently "wobbles" to and from the sun during orbit which is said to be the blame for such drastic weather changes. But, to humans it seems rather gradual because this is on geological terms (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/redface.gif)
Since the report of the intial locating of the hole in the Ozone layer, observation has shown that since then, the hole gets larger, and smaller over time.
And last of all the time sequence that the entire concept of global warming is based on is a period of less then 50 years. On the earth's time line of geological events, that is not evan an instant...it is nothing. How is it not true? they haven't had the equipment to measure such things before the last fifty years...and that's what millions and millions of dollars are being spent on to find a solution to something that may not be worth it. I'm sure it would suck if we humans reduced our emissions to natural levels and global warming increased (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But blah. I voted for McCain. An honest man is hard to find in politics. I admire him for presuing the campagin against soft money.
Burp
- Jig
-
Sheesh!
OK, no more jokes....some of you guys have NO sense of humor!
Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse ME!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Thanks StSanta
Coming from a European, I'll take your post as a compliment
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't believe when they wrote the constitution they had any idea of the welfare program we now have in the states.
Don't think they envisioned nukes either. Do know they had lofty goals about equality, opportunity and freedom.
What's wrong with working for a living? Too many people here laying around looking for the government to give them everything. The democrats only have to provide the illusion that the republicans are going to take away their free ride and whoa, they jump up and vote against it. Keeping the slick willie's in office.
Hm, must me fewer than here, with our extensive welfare system. And, oddly enough, the majority of voters here are middle class people, not welfare ones. All is good if ya can support yerself, ain't much dignity in being a burden to others. Ain't much future in it either.
Just for the record, I've been married since I was 19 (to the same wonderful woman)(1979). I've been a father since
I was 19 (two fantastic sons).
Well, congrats (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). I'm single, and staying so hating the compromises that comes with relationships. Kids? My brother has some, so some of our shared dna has already been passed, no need for me to hurry (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Hey guess what, I've been working full time since I was 19. I was raising a family on $3.10 an hour when I was 19 when minimum wage was $2.25. Working 55 to 70 hrs a week to provide for the family.
I was fortunate to be in a line of work that provided massive amounts of overtime. No hand outs. No government assistance. I'm now a computer programmer for a large multimedia firm (about to become even larger . So if I can do it, I wonder why most of the others can't. One word - LAZY. The government has made it too darn easy. Almost a drug for some. And when the republicans try to get these people to work, we're mean spirited.
Well, you might have been fortunate as you put it yourself. You might also have more stamina and dedication and belief in yourself than others do. We're all different, and I do not expect normal people to perform like me, for better or worse. However, I do believe that saying the reason they're on the bum side of life is because they're lazy is overly simplistic - there ae tons of factors involved and a good number of thesis's done on it from social science people.
For instance, income inequality is closely linked to crime rate, which of course is directly linked to your personal safety and that of your loved ones.
The democrats are good in the way they provide a balance to the other extreme. I just can't see how any hard working, God fearing US citizen can buy into their agenda though.
Well, I can see how one can be a republican, and I can see why one can be a democrat. Don't know about god fearing though, as this concept has always amused me a bit, til things turn bad and people start offing each other over it.
As for the Boy Scouts, it's an organization with rules. Follow them or don't join. It's not like they've changed them or
anything, pretty black and white.
Aye, but it's just that these dudes are role model for yer kids, and what they're teaching is exclusion and intolerance in a certain way. "We want you if you're straight and Christian" can sound awfully a lot like "we want you if you're pure blooded white and believes in Chtuhlu" or some other rather abritrary form discriminating.
I say let them have their rules, but good role models, they ain't, and good for teaching kids tolerance, they ain't either.
As for homosexuals, nothing against them in their own place. Don't believe they should be leaders in the Boy Scouts just like I don't think heterosexual men should be leaders in the Girl Scouts. I have had many gay friends and associates. I'm fine with it as long as they don't flaunt it or try to pass it off as an alternative lifestyle to our youth.
Ah, you fear some kind of sexual abuse? That would be a valid concern, but pedophiles and sex criminals aren't really in the same category as homosexuals I think.
Personally, I mind as much of them flaunting their sexual preference as I mind heterosexuals doing it - i.e nothing. I don't think of it as an alternative lifestyle - they seem to have little choice. And life as a homosexual sure seems a lot harder with all the prejudices around. Somehow I doubt that homosexuality is a conscious choice, just as I doubt I consciously have chosen to be straight. Am damned happy I am, as all men are ugly, and some women ain't (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). Homosexuality can be found in other animal species as well, and is nothing really unusual.
And who cares who the hell you sleep with and how? That's how I see it. I'm more tired of hearing the stories my hetereo friends (girls and boys) tell me than I am of hearing about the love lives of one of my gay friends.
So, I don't advocate gay rights, as they should just be the same as everyone else's. I don't advocate an alternative life style, as it ain't. It's just sexual preference. What I do advocate is tolerance towards it; or rather, not making a big fuzz about such a minor thing. Same thing about cults or religions (same thing to me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)). Build a church, build a mosque, bow to whatever deity you wish as long as you don't force it down my throat or try to make it into law.
Oh, and those %&/%/¤&#% church bells early Sunday mornings are T&/%¤&¤& irritating - there you are, a nice hangover, tired and weary, and what happens? DING DING DING.
Somehow, methinks the Christians do it just to haunt me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
StSanta,thanks again for your reponse and please don't take this personal as I do enjoy the deliberation.
Ah, I won't, as long as you don't either. I like conversations too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Toad, see what ya started
He knoweth, and smileth (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Al Gore - I went to Nam. Smoked a joint or two. Wrote about it. Woohoo.
Funny how much this mattered to Republicans 4 and 8 years ago. Gore was a combat reporter. That means he was in the field. No evidence that he "smoked a joint or two" as you so nicely insinuated.
GW Bush - My dad was in the Navy. He pulled some questionable strings to get me above a 100,000 man waiting list to get into the AFR. Can he help it he has connections? I mean, I DID keep the Cong outta Texas!
And smoked, drank and took who knows what illegal substances, but hey, since I'm a Republican they were just youthful indiscretions. Now if a Democrat had done it, well, that'd be different.
Funny how the Republicans also cared about these issues so much more 4 and 8 years ago.
Go Al!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Sisu
-Karnak [/B]
Yup Gore Jr. went to Vietnam. As far as I know/have heard though he never saw any action, and he had a body guard assigned to him by his father. Hehe body guard, press never tells you about that though. And he did smoke those couple of joints, at least he said he did.
Did GW have some strings pulled? I dunno, I don't realy care. All I know is that he SERVED in the Texas Air National Guard and he flew f105's. So in my book he risked his bellybutton flying the "thud" and served his country here at home. He didn't have a body guard, and he didn't go to Moscow to protest the war. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) He WAS a pilot (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
As for his partying, he says he did it he says he stopped when he turned 40. Heck I love to party, can't wait for the con (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I don't care that he partied, I care on wether or not he admits to it. He did admit to it, just not any specifics.
8 years ago comrad Klinton LIED about it and said he didn;t inhale! LOL! Just like he LIES about everything else that he talks about. The man is a liar, and Gore has supported him blindly for 8 long years. Which makes him a liar too, even if you don't count his own lies over the past 8 years.
"No controling legal authority" Is this what you want to hear from your national leaders? Not me... I wonder, has Gore ever had a REAL job? Oh wait that's right he ran the family tobacco farm back home. Where he "worked the tobacco with his bare hands" hehe I better stop now, I'm getting all worked up and I need to be working (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
BTW Karnak, are you going to the con? If so, please let's not talk polotics there. For that weekend I'm "non-political" and I let my hair down. I hope you do come so you can see how horible things like the atmosphere are here in Tx. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
Udie
-
Originally posted by mietla:
It's not that I'm dying to talk to you...
Karnak,
I'm still not "dying", but I'm still curious. Why don't you engage my arguments?
I have always tought that the reasonable folks can always engage in a fierce debate and still try to present their line of thinking.
It's not that you owe me, you owe the Forum, buddy.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
The reason such luminaries as Abraham Lincoln (our greatest President),... -Karnak
This is the ONLY thing you have said that I agree with completely!
Voss
-
Karnak,
I'm sorry I tuned into this thread so late.
Rush Limburger(<=Spelling Whatever??) humor generally makes me nausious. But I just wanted to say. You Da Man!!
From another card carring liberal.
Funny I'm Pro-death penalty and I don't like abortion but I won't tell someone else how to live their life. But I'm still a liberal because republicans just make you take sides.
The other funny thing is how all of Republicans seem to be from lightly populated areas and the Democrats seem to live in population centers. I guess real republicans can't even stand to be around each other huh??
Later
F4UDOA
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
The other funny thing is how all of Republicans seem to be from lightly populated areas and the Democrats seem to live in population centers. I guess real republicans can't even stand to be around each other huh??
Later
F4UDOA
Funny you should bring that up. I've been thinking about that lately. It all started with the "HO's are bad" thread.
At first I thought I detected a "Europe vs US" split, with the Euros wanting everyone to "conform to the rules" and the Yanks saying "do your own thing...it's a free game."
That wasn't it tho...because there was a significant number of North Americans wanting "conformity" too...and most of those seemed to be posting from densely populated areas.
Now I am wondering if population density has that effect.
You cram a bunch of people into a small area and they react by creating "standardized rules of conduct" and all must conform for it to work smoothly. So, they give up individual freedom/preference for bland standardization and a perception of "safety".
As you spread people out, they are (and have to be) less dependent on society in general. When you live 15 miles from the nearest gas station, and 50 from a hospital you have to be more self-reliant and careful about what you do. At the same time, I think it's pretty natural that you feel independent and unbound by what your distant neighbor considers "proper".
I'm still mulling this all over in my mind. I'm sure I've stepped on some toes here.
I do think that packing people into a city has an effect on the way they think and act. It really doesn't suprise me that the city-dwellers are willing to give up liberty for perceived safety. I think they lose their self-reliance.
The rural folks, otoh, have never lost their self-reliance...they can't or they wouldn't make it. Thus, they feel no urge to give up any freedom.
Have a nice day!
-
Mietla,
Dude, have I got a wake up for you.
The only reason anybody, I mean anybody in this country has a leg to stand on other than ultra rich is because of
1. Immigrant labor from the late 19th century and early 20th century to include the Chinese, Italian, Irish and Jewish. They where brought here by republicans as skilled but almost slave labor by the Carnagie's and Rockafeller's(SP)and Duponts to replace slavery. They built the cities and railroads and fought the wars that made this country what it is today.
2. Organized labor. Those same groups fought for workers right when there were none. They were murdered and beated by the likes of Gen.Douglas Mcarther himself. They fought the hard fight so you and children wouldn't have to. They helped pull this country out of the great depression created by Republicans and their wisdom of greed, as well as seperated a small percentage of the wealth for the working people in this country.
This is why everytime I hear some Republican idiot spouting off about the
"Real Americans" I want to throwup on the TV set.
So when workers who don't have the ability to get training for themselves want an extra dollar an hour from the likes of the mega corperations in this country I say give it up. It will cost you allot less than supporting those same people if and when this country falls into a recession again, like the last time there was a Republican president. And please don't tell me that it will kill small business. The Walmarts and K-Marts are doing a far greater job of that.
BTW, I don't where you got the number that the top 1% of the weathly pay 50% of the taxes. It must have been from some Republican propaganda. Just think about that statement for a minute? If they were constantly paying 50% wouldn't they evenually go under?? When was the last time you heard of a multi-millionare going under?
In the end I doubt that anyone that rich pays over 5% taxes. Just look at your buddy George W. or Dick Cheney. Millionares at birth. And they have been in office collecting a goverment check ever since. I don't think they pay very much at all.
Here is a stat I do believe though.
The top 1% of wealthy people in this country control 90% of the wealth. And have since before you and I, and everyone you know were born. And you don't know their names for the most part.
Later
F4UDOA
-
Toad,
That personel freedom you enjoy in the rural areas is a bi-product of the union of a group of large cities and states that garauntee your freedom and safety. You say that we have perceived freedom. You got that backwards. It is the existance of the large cities in the country that support this whole thing. You may never want to come visit but we preserve your life style.
What you describe as your eutopia is really anarchy. And if North America was in a state of anarchy how long do you think it would take for other countries to carve up that terratory no matter how many automatic weapons you have in your basement? Even the smallest countries would be a threat. What do you think those pesky Columbian death squads would do to a bunch of farm boys when they come up there to get some payback??
Here is my theory on why republicans are the way they are. Republicans are like dogs and cats that don't get socialized properly when they are young. If you can't play well with others then go get your own sandbox mentality. And that's OK. I just don't want you running a country with 300million people in it if you can't even stand seeing your neighbors more than once a day.
Later
F4UDOA
Ps. I think your statement about perceived safety is backwards also. Note all of the Highschool shootings from the past two years have been in very lightly populated areas where it is perceived to be safe. Nobody in NY. makes that assumption.
-
F4UDOA,
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAH!!!!!!
-
Thanks F4UDOA.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only liberal who enjoys a fasination with WWII and WWII aircraft. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Its nice to hear from guys like you and Hangtime. Makes me feel a little less of an outcast.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
And Al Gore and Bill Clinton are rags to riches types? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) Politicians are aristocrates/elitests by nature, although there are exceptions.
I love it when someone tries to make an idealology out of being a conservative or liberal. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
In all honesty I just follow the issues and try to figure out empty promises and real ones.
Anything that can be said about one side can often be applied to the other (and I'm tired of hearing Al's fake stories, like the one about the Unions... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) )
I've been voting for the penguins, but not this year, nope, voting for the Polar bears in this year's North Pole elections.
Both canidates are goobers this year. And Pat is insane. I really wish McCain would of got the nomination and I hope his soft money policy get passed.
- Jig
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Toad,
That personel freedom you enjoy in the rural areas is a bi-product of the union of a group of large cities and states that garauntee your freedom and safety. You say that we have perceived freedom. You got that backwards. It is the existance of the large cities in the country that support this whole thing. You may never want to come visit but we preserve your life style.
What you describe as your eutopia is really anarchy. And if North America was in a state of anarchy how long do you think it would take for other countries to carve up that terratory no matter how many automatic weapons you have in your basement? Even the smallest countries would be a threat. What do you think those pesky Columbian death squads would do to a bunch of farm boys when they come up there to get some payback??
Here is my theory on why republicans are the way they are. Republicans are like dogs and cats that don't get socialized properly when they are young. If you can't play well with others then go get your own sandbox mentality. And that's OK. I just don't want you running a country with 300million people in it if you can't even stand seeing your neighbors more than once a day.
Later
F4UDOA
Ps. I think your statement about perceived safety is backwards also. Note all of the Highschool shootings from the past two years have been in very lightly populated areas where it is perceived to be safe. Nobody in NY. makes that assumption.
LOL this is some funny stuff. Rural people = anarchism...hehehehe.
Far from it. I think we have alot more respect for one another when we don't have to put up with seeing the same people everyday, having them make to much noise, etc.
Large cities have never been about freedom. They are about order. You give up freedoms (restrictions on how, what and where you do to keep order and promote equality) in order to prevent the whole anarchism thing. (that is a conservative ideal order-->freedom-->equality in that order of importance)
Rural areas don't have the conflicts of urbanization, such as space, traffic and all that stuff, less need for order because people aren't so close togather(less chance of aggressive action) so they give up less freedoms for order. Hardly anarchism.
By definition a city must have more governmental control because the more people there are in one area, the more conflict of wants and needs there are. Rural areas just don't need that kind of regulation. Ever been stopped in a rural town? The cops are alot stricter then city cops when it comes to little things. And where I use to live the Game Wardens did double duty, as traffic cops and game regulation. City police see so many little things they let them go because it's pointless to waste time on it. Priorities and all.
Let us not forget, the US was in a state of anarchism (quite literally) as soon as the western frontieer was opened and until it closed. Very low population densities. No Hostile take overs. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
When people get togather, bad things are bound to happen.
Btw the recent massacres have been in areas with high population densitys. Columbine had a very high school attendence. The suburbs of Colorado had a major population explosion in the last few decades (yanno, what south park is based on (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) ) It's considered safe because that's one of those Urban images...the safe suburbs.
There was 8 people in my graduating class. That's light (SPARSH!) population
They had no problems with us brining shotguns or squirrel rifles to school (provided they were locked down during the day in a closet, but thats because we didn't want people messing with them (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) ) because we had such a small class of people and often went hunting in the mornings before school and then after. In fact it was the norm to bring a new deer rifle or something of that nature to show it off, as we tended to be over proud of it.
wth was I? Oh yeah, ruralism is not equal to anarchism (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Maybe libertarianism.
I live around Houston now. I'm desensatised from watching the news every night. I swear we have at least one murder/serious assault every night. That kinda crap didn't happen in Alto, Texas.
Cities sustain people. They don't sustain freedom and security. People and order, thats about it.
People as a whole sustain freedom and security.
- Jig
-
Jigster,
Large cities have never been about freedom. They are about order. You give up freedoms (restrictions on how, what and where you do to keep order and promote equality) in order to prevent the whole anarchism thing. (that is a conservative ideal order-->freedom-->equality in that order of importance)
I don't define personal freedom as the ability to find a parking spot. It has more to do with things like minorites being able to walk down the street without fear of being drug behind a pickup truck until their limbs fall off. Are those the restrictions your speak of? It's called the bill of rights. And yes I have had the experiance of driving through a small town.
It is also not what I would descibe as personal freedom. It is as close to being arrested in a third word country as you can get. Judge, Jury and trial all wrapped up around one fat guy with a badge. Is that a conservative idealogy too? I don't recall Jesse Healms being a big supporter of civil liberties. BTW, the bigginings of civil law comes from the earliest interpratations of the Bible in Talmudic Law written by Jews from about 500BC. to 1000AD. I'm pretty sure even then that Jewish people were Democrats.
Let us not forget, the US was in a state of anarchism (quite literally) as soon as the western frontieer was opened and until it closed. Very low population densities. No Hostile take overs.
Dude? Surely you are joking? That is exactly what happened. Have you forgotten the Alamo in the South with the Spanish/Mexican? How about the the French/Indian war? Why do you think we aren't in Canada? And what happened to the only "real americans" the American Indians? The only reason the "west was won" is because of the US. Cavalry coming out there to save it's citizens. Unfortunatly the people that currently occupy that space are not as grateful as it's original occupants. However countries like Columbia, Cuba and Nicaragua were not in a position to make claims at that time.
Later
F4UDOA
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
It is the existance of the large cities in the country that support this whole thing. You may never want to come visit but we preserve your life style.
Really?
How much wheat do you guys grow downtown? Did they ever get that new feedlot built in downtown Trenton? I bet the Newark inner city vegetable farms are going great guns...selling the surplus overseas yet? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
You preserve the RURAL lifestyle? Hey, maybe you can quit your day job!
The cities could all disappear and life on the Kansas prairie could simply revert to the way it was 150 years ago. A harder life? Most definitely! But doable none the less.
Can modern Newark say the same thing? Could it exist under the conditions of 150 years ago? Well, after the slaughter of it's inhabitants when your highly regulated society broke down...the survivors could try. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Anarchy in rural areas? Not at all. Absolutely much less regulated, however. In short, what Jig said.
-
Toad,
Ehhh, yes we could live without the entire Mid-west. New Jersey is still mostly farm land. I live in a densly populated area but I can walk to a horse farm from my house.
In fact Cherry Hill refers to the origin of the comminity which was a Cherry orcherd. I still have two apple trees in my backyard from previous days. And yet I am 10 minutes from Downtown Phila.
Do you think the Mid-West would survive if there was no large coastal cities or sea ports? Do you think you would have Cars or heavy machinery, fuel or clean water without the cities to provide manufacturing and logistics? Your current life would be unrecognizable. And of course there is having to learn how to speak spanish factor. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Later
F4UDOA
-
Republicans and Democrats huh...
I was a staunch Republican untill Tricky Dick came to office. Ya all know him, He's the one that prolonged the Nam war for politcal gains...and relieved an estimated 20 thousand parents of the burden of seeing their sons <and daughters> grow up to have families of their own.
BTW...I first went there under a Democratic administration because it was my duty. I went back 2 more times because my experience was needed to help keep the "fish" alive.
So George Jr. flew jets eh...dangerous, shure, but compaired to the rest of us durring the war...wussy, very wussy.
Lars <'67-72 in country>
[This message has been edited by MrLars (edited 09-22-2000).]
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
New Jersey is still mostly farm land
Your current life would be unrecognizable.
This is what I love about discussing something with you F4!
So you are saying that the RURAL areas of New Jersey would support the CITIES?
Exactly! The cities can't survive without rural areas, not the other way around as you previously stated.
Try this theoretical postulate...remove all products based on raw materials or products that are produced in rural areas (outside city limits) from the store shelves in any city.
Remove all products produced with materials and labor obtained inside of any "city limits" from any rural store shelves.
Which population would be in trouble the fastest?
As to your other point:
Of course life 150 years ago bears no relation to life today. NO argument there.
The difference is that I could easily survive here under those conditions. People in NYC or EWR or PHL wouldn't...you WOULD finally understand anarchy then. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And finally, here's a thought to consider...
When you city folk get together in those nice suburban neighborhoods, what's the first thing that happens? Well, you get a covenant for the neighborhood that tells you how hi your "privacy" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) fence can be, what kind of siding goes on your house and on and on and on....might I suggest that this is just one little, tiny freedom you give up for the security of your investments?
Well, why did people leave the "Old World" to come to the "New World"? Basically they were a bit tired of being told how to live their lives (of course, there are other reasons too).
Why did people leave the settled part of the East and come West? I suggest to you it was partly that same sentiment.
Therefore, the ancestors out here tended to come from rather "independent thinkers".
I like to believe that spirit is still more prevalent on this side of the River.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
F4UDOA...
Jersy eh. I used to go to Hadden <sp?> Heights on garbage pick-up day and collect some really great furniture the affluent would toss out. Spent some time at Ft. Dix and lived in Lindenwold, worked in Camden and went to college at Rutgers there.
Everybody knows that there ain't no cherries in Cherry Hill...women or the fruit variety!
Lars <--- can't understand why anyone that pronounces water as wutter and coffee as coaffee thinks us Californians have accents.
[This message has been edited by MrLars (edited 09-22-2000).]